Subscribe-
Children Playing Before a Statue of Hercules
ed. David Sedaris - Publisher: Simon and Schuster
- Year: 2005
- Pages: 352
- №61
-
Model Patient
by Karen Duffy - Publisher: William Morrow
- Year: 2000
- Pages: 272
- №62
-
Dress Your Family in Corduroy and Denim
by David Sedaris - Publisher: Back Bay Books
- Year: 2005
- Pages: 272
- №63
-
The Search
by John Battelle - Publisher: Portfolio Hardcover
- Year: 2005
- Pages: 320
- №64
Brady
/ Sunday, April 3rd, 2005Did you raid my bookshelf? Because if you haven’t yet, I’ve got the Russel book and Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance.
Ben
/ Sunday, April 3rd, 2005Yeah, that’s where I got them from. I’ll also probably read the philosophy of the Matrix book.
sasha
/ Thursday, June 23rd, 2005hi, found this site searching something on google, but aynways, ive read a book on the philosophy of the matrix, and if youre talking about the same one, it wasn’t very good. Some good points in teh beginning, but the rest of the book is really repetitive.
anyways, cool site
misspinkerton
/ Thursday, September 22nd, 2005no need to study the philosophy of the Matrix, it can all be summed up in one concise story:
Plato’s Parable of the Cave (Also known as the Allegory of the Cave)
That’s it and that’s all. Though, that paved the way for many future philosophic/psychoanalytic theories—Like Althusser’s Ideolgical States and Ideological State Apparatusses, or Lacan’s “Mirror Stage as a Formative Function of the I”
Ben
/ Thursday, September 22nd, 2005If that were true, the series wouldn’t have been as bad as it was. The problem was, they started with Plato’s cave allegory, but then threw in an omnium gatherum of other, unrelated philosophies.
grindbastard
/ Monday, October 17th, 2005The problem with the philosophy of the Matrix is that not everyone is a raging pothead and therefore won’t find it so mind blowing.
Ben
/ Monday, October 17th, 2005“Like, what if the world we think we see… [dramatic pause] isn’t there?”
“Dude, that’s deep.”
david
/ Monday, May 29th, 2006i always thought the “deeper” philosophy of the matrix were the moral implications of artificial intelligence.
if you create self-aware, free-will beings such as the computer programs, beings that can see the wrongness/rightness of their actions (think the program at the train station who makes sacrifices for his daughter-program in order to give her a better “life”/existence), then this “artificial” intelligence would have the same moral value as a human being. that’s why the movies had to end with the “copout” resolution of peace. for either side, humans or machines,to wipe out the other would be to commit genocide in a sense. to create artificial intelligence—truly self-aware artificial intelligence—would be to create something on an equal metaphysical plane of existence with ourselves.
would we be gods? perhaps.
and if that’s true, kind of gives you a whole new perspective on what happens after death. pull the plug on a “computer program,” and we all know it ceases to be. pull the plug on a human? philosophers and theologians have been guessing at that for… well, forever.